...to fall back into the world of sophistry again, grasping for straws, reaching out for something not there, using verbal gymnastics to aid me in my quest to keep from falling into the void of what I SUSPECT is true, but too afraid to admit it. You know the kind, those who look a little something like this!:
Then don't. You look kind of two-dimensional in a suit and tie anyway, if this picture is to be believed. Peace and Love
Call it what you may, Libertine. Only by your opinion are we using verbal gymnastics or grasping for straws... Remember, the anti-christian debate that many people start here is just "80% of the bible is inaccurate" or "the bible was changed" without providing a single site to prove their claims. You may say that we're bending over backwards, I say you guys are spreading rumors.
I am afraid that circular arguments, post hoc, question begging and the appeal to ignorance are, indeed, verbal gymnastics and not only that, but FALLACIES as well. I've never said "80% blah blah blah"... I have simply asked questions, made a few statements, stated some facts, stated some theory, challenged assumptions, and made a reasonable assessment of the arguments given me.
The Jesus Seminar: The Search for Authenticity -- Richard Shand's detailed summary of the debate over the criteria, methodology, & conclusions of the Seminar (1996). I don't consider my own investigation into the historocity of the gospels "anti-christian", just pro-truth. Unless you consider those concepts mutually exclusive.
dead link. If you are talking about this page: http://www.mystae.com/restricted/reflections/messiah/seminar.html that is a page where a bunch of people VOTED whether they believed Jesus said/did something like that... ...Since when does a bunch of men voting make it certain whether Jesus did something or not? How is it that the writers of the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are not certain enough, that a bunch of men 2000 years later can vote on Jesus's life? I've never seen anything like this. Take a step back, and think...
That "bunch of men" was composed of the most renowned and respected bible scholars in the world. It's a typical apologist tactic to downplay the signifigance of the opposing evidence, or the credentials of anyone who's veiws differ from theirs. I've read a little about what apologists have to say about the Jesus seminar. apologists tend to stoop to mudslinging of the seminar itself rather than offering any intellegent rebuttal to it's findings. Any way you're asking for "proof" and "certainty". there's no such thing when you're studing history, there's only evidence and what it adds up to.
Ok. Several are available here in such threads as "Win My Soul!", "so....", and "God Is Love"...all in the Christian Forums. Some examples I've dealt with here and on other forums from Christians are as follows: AD HOC: Ryupower and a few others here have given me "evidence" of themselves or some they know being "HEALED BY THE LORD". Really? AD HOMINEM: paulfreespirit called me the "antichrist" and several others called me names and insulted me. Not an argument. APPEAL TO EMOTION (fear): "You're going to Hell". This was Amber's favorite. MollyBloom (I love her), suggests several times that we should just accept "God" based on feelings and so do several others, seahorse, for example. SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF: Several HipForums Christians- "You can't prove there's not a God!!" The Burden of Proof is on the claimant. Theism says, "I believe there's a god!", Atheism says, "I don't believe that." Thus, the theist must give us a reason they have introduced this "god". The doubter has perfect reason to doubt until the claimant comes up with the goods. APPEAL TO IGNORANCE: Several HipForums Christians- I don't know how many times I've heard that since we can't explain something, thus "God did it". These people introduce, without evidence, a foreign concept and attribute the LACK OF EVIDENCE presented by the scientist or atheist to be EVIDENCE for their own invented argument. Several others have been guilty of presupposition (including Kharakov, Art Delfo, JesusDiedForU, etc.)... If you want a first hand FRIENDLY debate, I will be more than happy to oblige.
NaykidApe, look at the site. They voted whether Jesus would have said that. Or whether he would have done that. They look for other sources to agree with the bible, and by sheer abscense of sources, they vote the bible is wrong. Straight from that website: "The voters favored passages attested to by two or more sources. If there aren't two or more sources, that does NOT mean something is automatically false.
I would love to see you debate campbell. Just you and him with no one else to give their two sence. I think there would be a lot more accomplished and more understanding on both sides.
I would love to debate campbell34. I think he is very educated and I've yet to see him ad hominem anyone. I think it would be classic. Anytime.
That would likely be impossible. However, introduce the thread as A vs. B...and on the corresponding opener ask all participants to respectly respond only briefly and only to the debate itself.
I'll moderate that discussion. Libertine, just because you've dredged up some beautiful memories I leave you with a medley of Chickisms.... GULP! HAW HAW HAW!!! YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
Iron Goth, I LOVE JACK T. CHICK AND IF YOU MOCK HIM, YOU'LL BURN IN HELL!!! GULP! HAW HAW HAW!!! YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!! LOL... And as I said, I would enjoy debating campbell34. I think it would be a scholarly, informative and professional, solid debate.
When I was a kid I used to collect Chick tracts. I know this Christian bookstore in town that has a ton of them. I read 'em now just for entertainment value. It's some of the best comic "literature" out there....*snicker, snicker*
I was thrown out of a Canadian Christian bookstore for asking if they had em. I then moved to Memphis and started finding them regularly showing up on my desk.